Doubling Up On Road

Status
Not open for further replies.
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

theclaud

Openly Marxist
Location
Swansea
This is a genuine question.

Do you think that a person who drives more often will have more sympathy with other motorists as opposed to someone such as yourself who drives as little as they need to?

It speaks volumes that you need to preface it as such...


Yes, I do think that, although it's not quite that simple. I haven't always been a cyclist, and there was a time when I enjoyed driving. I am a much better driver now that I have come to dislike it. Driving stunts the imagination, and the flip side of your question is obvious. I have a lot of sympathy with (elective) motorists in the same way that I have with turkeys who vote for Christmas.
 

lukesdad

Guest
[QUOTE 1588996"]
And even after clarification you continued to misunderstand...
[/quote]

......and will continue to do so untill it becomes clear you know what your talking about let alone anybody else.
 

benb

Evidence based cyclist
Location
Epsom
Credit to the moderators for allowing this thread to run despite the disruptive intentions of r2d2 and mrpaul. I am reassured that sense has prevailed and that the vast majority of forumers seem to think that we should Be considerate to other road users and where safe allow cars to overtake by riding in secondary single file. Clearly the militant philosophy that 2abreast is justified unquestioningly soley on the basis of legality and that making concessions to motorists is sign of spineless weakness are a small but vocal minority.
Us good cyclists have a duty to speak up lest these deluded fundamentalists are mistakenly taken as being representative of all of us.
In the same way , and in the absence of any arguement in favour of large groups of cyclists , i am sure that the majority of forumers also agree with me that large groups of cyclists should be discouraged and where numbers are high organisers should have the consideration and a sufficent sense of responsibility to stagger the total into smaller groups.

What is wrong with you? Why do you insist on arguing against a position that no-one is putting forward?

No-one has said they would continue to ride 2 abreast, deliberately holding up traffic, if it was safe to single up and let the car(s) through. Almost everyone has said that they would stay in 2 abreast to prevent an unsafe overtake, and that in many cases it's easier to overtake cyclists 2 abreast than single file. Stop it with your ridiculous straw man arguments please.

And I very much doubt whether the majority of forummers would agree that large groups of cyclists should be discouraged. Seeing as the majority of problems are caused by motorised traffic, we should be discouraging large groups of that instead.
 

lukesdad

Guest
[QUOTE 1588995"]
No. You're commenting on a view which I haven't said I hold.
[/quote]


You held a view on what I was, or not reading. Make your mind up.
 

montyboy

New Member
It speaks volumes that you need to preface it as such...


Yes, I do think that, although it's not quite that simple. I haven't always been a cyclist, and there was a time when I enjoyed driving. I am a much better driver now that I have come to dislike it. Driving stunts the imagination, and the flip side of your question is obvious. I have a lot of sympathy with (elective) motorists in the same way that I have with turkeys who vote for Christmas.


I cant win with you.

I preface my question as previously you have questioned the intention of my posts. Unfortunately you interpret this prefacing as an admission of previously doing exactley what you have accused me of.

:sad:
 

theclaud

Openly Marxist
Location
Swansea
I cant win with you.

I preface my question as previously you have questioned the intention of my posts. Unfortunately you interpret this prefacing as an admission of previously doing exactley what you have accused me of.

:sad:

Relax, Monty - it was just a gentle dig, and hardly unwarranted. I've answered the question, have I not?
 

Bicycle

Guest
Yes, I do think that, although it's not quite that simple. I haven't always been a cyclist, and there was a time when I enjoyed driving. I am a much better driver now that I have come to dislike it. Driving stunts the imagination, and the flip side of your question is obvious. I have a lot of sympathy with (elective) motorists in the same way that I have with turkeys who vote for Christmas.


The above response may identify where we differ.

I am a keen cyclist, as you are. I am also a keen motorist. I'm sorry you dislike driving and I'm not sure why you think it stunts the imagination.

Unlike you, I have 'always been a cyclist'. I've cycled since I was old enough to balance a bicycle. I've ridden for 40+ years and I love it. I've driven for 30+ years and love it just as much.

I thoroughly enjoy driving and I also find it makes myriad tasks and responsibilities easier. I could probably keep up with my family's pursuits with only one car, but life with no cars at all would mean stopping so many activities that life would become quite different. We'd also see rather less of in-laws and grandparents...

I confess that I do not begin to understand your Christmas analogy. Turkeys who vote for Christmas (if we assume complete knowledge) are behaving suicidally.

Although I'm far from the best driver, I'm not sure the act of driving is quite akin to suicide. My family might take issue with that statement...
 

Christopher

Über Member
I'm absolutely amazed at the Clarkson-like attitudes of some of the posters to this thread that I at least thought were primarily cyclists who drove, rather than motorists who sometimes ride a bicycle. I mean posters who are otherwise reasonable, not the fc troll.
 

montyboy

New Member
I'm absolutely amazed at the Clarkson-like attitudes of some of the posters to this thread that I at least thought were primarily cyclists who drove, rather than motorists who sometimes ride a bicycle. I mean posters who are otherwise reasonable, not the fc troll.


why do you differentiate between the two?
 

Christopher

Über Member
Because there's a world of difference between the attitudes displayed in Bicycle's rather offensive (to me) post a couple of pages back, listing various cycling stereotypes*, and theclaud's responses to that post.

*posted at 0950 today - can't say them number as I cannot see it on this old browser (IE6!). And no I haven't flagged it.
 

Bicycle

Guest
Because there's a world of difference between the attitudes displayed in Bicycle's rather offensive (to me) post a couple of pages back, listing various cycling stereotypes*, and theclaud's responses to that post.

*posted at 0950 today - can't say them number as I cannot see it on this old browser (IE6!). And no I haven't flagged it.

I'm sorry if my earlier post caused offence. I thought it was largely very pro-cyclist.

I even admitted that I'll shortly be a noddy-headed dawdler myself and admitted that I've never had the speed to be a lycra missile on a posh ride.

I imagine these were the phrases you found rather offensive. It's not the nodding, the dawdling or the lycra I object to. it's inconsiderate riding.

I fell into cheap stereotypes in a failed attempt to paint a picture. This doesn't make me some sort of baddie.

Some of my best friends are cyclists.
 

theclaud

Openly Marxist
Location
Swansea
The above response may identify where we differ.

I am a keen cyclist, as you are. I am also a keen motorist. I'm sorry you dislike driving and I'm not sure why you think it stunts the imagination.

Unlike you, I have 'always been a cyclist'. I've cycled since I was old enough to balance a bicycle. I've ridden for 40+ years and I love it. I've driven for 30+ years and love it just as much.

I thoroughly enjoy driving and I also find it makes myriad tasks and responsibilities easier. I could probably keep up with my family's pursuits with only one car, but life with no cars at all would mean stopping so many activities that life would become quite different. We'd also see rather less of in-laws and grandparents...

I confess that I do not begin to understand your Christmas analogy. Turkeys who vote for Christmas (if we assume complete knowledge) are behaving suicidally.

Although I'm far from the best driver, I'm not sure the act of driving is quite akin to suicide. My family might take issue with that statement...

Actually I didn't put it terribly well. It's not driving in itself I dislike - as someone who rather likes going too fast, there is an imaginary realm in which the pleasure of driving still makes sense to me - it is the participation in a largely antisocial activity, the experience of individualism in action, that I don't enjoy. Much as one might be unable to enjoy the pleasure of a private beach in the knowledge that the locals are fenced out. The car as an instrument of liberation is a fantasy.

As for turkeys and Christmas, I give you these wise words, more eloquent than mine:

The habitual passenger cannot grasp the folly of traffic based overwhelmingly on transport. His inherited perceptions of space and time and of personal pace have been industrially deformed. He has lost the power to conceive of himself outside the passenger role. Addicted to being carried along, he has lost control over the physical, social, and psychic powers that reside in man’s feet. The passenger has come to identify territory with the untouchable landscape through which he is rushed. He has become impotent to establish his domain, mark it with his imprint, and assert his sovereignty over it. He has lost confidence in his power to admit others into his presence and to share space consciously with them. He can no longer face the remote by himself. Left on his own, he feels immobile.

The habitual passenger must adopt a new set of beliefs and expectations if he is to feel secure in the strange world where both liaisons and loneliness are products of conveyance. To “gather” for him means to be brought together by vehicles. He comes to believe that political power grows out of the capacity of a transportation system, and in its absence is the result of access to the television screen. He takes freedom of movement to be the same as one’s claim on propulsion. He believes that the level of democratic process correlates to the power of transportation and communications systems. He has lost faith in the political power of the feet and of the tongue. As a result, what he wants is not more liberty as a citizen but better service as a client. He does not insist on his freedom to move and to speak to people but on his claim to be shipped and to be informed by media. He wants a better product rather than freedom from servitude to it. It is vital that he come to see that the acceleration he demands is self-defeating, and that it must result in a further decline of equity, leisure, and autonomy.
 

Little yellow Brompton

A dark destroyer of biscuits!
Location
Bridgend
I'm sorry if my earlier post caused offence. I thought it was largely very pro-cyclist.

I even admitted that I'll shortly be a noddy-headed dawdler myself and admitted that I've never had the speed to be a lycra missile on a posh ride.

I imagine these were the phrases you found rather offensive. It's not the nodding, the dawdling or the lycra I object to. it's inconsiderate riding.

I fell into cheap stereotypes in a failed attempt to paint a picture. This doesn't make me some sort of baddie.

Some of my best friends are cyclists.


But!

The phrase "Some of my best friends are ... "must always be followed by "but"
 

montyboy

New Member
Actually I didn't put it terribly well. It's not driving in itself I dislike - as someone who rather likes going too fast, there is an imaginary realm in which the pleasure of driving still makes sense to me - it is the participation in a largely antisocial activity, the experience of individualism in action, that I don't enjoy. Much as one might be unable to enjoy the pleasure of a private beach in the knowledge that the locals are fenced out. The car as an instrument of liberation is a fantasy.

As for turkeys and Christmas, I give you these wise words, more eloquent than mine:

The habitual passenger cannot grasp the folly of traffic based overwhelmingly on transport. His inherited perceptions of space and time and of personal pace have been industrially deformed. He has lost the power to conceive of himself outside the passenger role. Addicted to being carried along, he has lost control over the physical, social, and psychic powers that reside in man’s feet. The passenger has come to identify territory with the untouchable landscape through which he is rushed. He has become impotent to establish his domain, mark it with his imprint, and assert his sovereignty over it. He has lost confidence in his power to admit others into his presence and to share space consciously with them. He can no longer face the remote by himself. Left on his own, he feels immobile.

The habitual passenger must adopt a new set of beliefs and expectations if he is to feel secure in the strange world where both liaisons and loneliness are products of conveyance. To “gather” for him means to be brought together by vehicles. He comes to believe that political power grows out of the capacity of a transportation system, and in its absence is the result of access to the television screen. He takes freedom of movement to be the same as one’s claim on propulsion. He believes that the level of democratic process correlates to the power of transportation and communications systems. He has lost faith in the political power of the feet and of the tongue. As a result, what he wants is not more liberty as a citizen but better service as a client. He does not insist on his freedom to move and to speak to people but on his claim to be shipped and to be informed by media. He wants a better product rather than freedom from servitude to it. It is vital that he come to see that the acceleration he demands is self-defeating, and that it must result in a further decline of equity, leisure, and autonomy.


Okay, I admit it. I havent got a clue what that means. :becool:
 

freecyclist

New Member
I'n not talking about verbal bullying Mark. That's another conversation.

They guy is a loon. If he honestly thinks that the majority of people on a cycling forum would agree with that nonsense statement he came out with then he deserves the loon tag.
This is a Cycling forum after all.

And there is the mentality that judges it acceptable to bully and label as loony anyone who has the temerity to question the prevailing extreme pro cycling view . Crawl back under your stone ian with the other knuckle draggers and come out again when youre willing to let other people express their views.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom